|
NY Times review of Nier - long story short, Schiesel wants the supreme court to play this game.  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/arts/television/04nier.html
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
bump_fn posted:NY Times review of Nier - long story short, Schiesel wants the supreme court to play this game.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 03:58
|
|
|
That's such a hilarious contrast to the Joystiq review. EDIT: I just did the barren temple quest where you save the bandit and the dumb rear end survivor tries to fight you and gets his rear end kicked. Kaine proceeds to threaten him by telling him she's going to cut off his balls and give them to a kid playing marbles in town. Kaine rules. InnercityGriot fucked around with this message at 04:02 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 03:58
|
|
|
That's a great review.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 03:59
|
|
|
My reactions in two emoticons: 1. The NY Times does video game reviews and reviewed Nier:  2. The NY Times reviewer wrote a completely glowing review:  e: VVV you do know that nier is based off of drakengard's ending e, right? so in the context of this game the naked baby apocalypse, y'know, happened? in another world anyway UselessLurker fucked around with this message at 04:34 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 04:05
|
|
|
I didn't think it was possible for a Cavia project to result in something more than the naked baby apocalypse from Drakengard, but there you go.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 04:28
|
|
|
so, i got this game cause i loved drakengard and all it's ridiculous deviance, but i never played drakengard 2. should i even bother now?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 04:57
|
|
|
bump_fn posted:so, i got this game cause i loved drakengard and all it's ridiculous deviance, but i never played drakengard 2. should i even bother now? No, drakengard 2's story is awful compared to one and they do horrible things to the awesomeness that was angelus/caim.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 05:01
|
|
|
Xythar posted:Facade is crazy but so awesome. Pro-tip tip for this, when you attack with your sword you move forward and destroy the balls. I just cut my way through the middle no problem spamming the attack button.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 07:26
|
|
|
YOTC posted:No, drakengard 2's story is awful compared to one and they do horrible things to the awesomeness that was angelus/caim. To me, all of that awesomeness was just from the characterization The Dark Id gave them in the Drakengard LP. Otherwise they were completely bland.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 07:32
|
|
|
Aaaaaaaa why does every loving jrpg need material grinding I know I'm literally on a path to destruction by continuing this to its conclusion, but here I am fighting these drat shades in hopes that this rear end in a top hat will drop the 3 more Forlorn Necklace and Broken Earrings I need for weapon crafting.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 07:33
|
|
|
http://au.gamespot.com/ps3/action/nier/review.html 5.0 from Gamespot. What the heck? They act like you spend the whole game doing fetch quests when they're mostly optional. I'd hate to see this guy try a Bioware RPG. Also quote:A couple of sequences all in text are neat at first, but they last far too long, describing fantastical events that you'd rather be experiencing than reading about. (You'll long for Lost Odyssey's similar but far superior dream sequences.) These parts that are done in text suck, but these parts done in text in a completely identical fashion in another game are way better.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 07:44
|
|
|
The ones in Nier are better as not only are they written well but they're interactive.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 07:46
|
|
|
Xythar posted:http://au.gamespot.com/ps3/action/nier/review.html 5.0 from Gamespot. What the heck? The reviewer likely did not get access to a FAQ or guide that told him everything he needed for the various endings, so the fetch quests are not "optional" then when you don't know the rewards you're going to get. Repeating "optional" doesn't really work when it's only optional if you don't care about extra endings or go into the game with prior outside knowledge. Beyond that, "optional" shouldn't be an excuse for bad or unfun. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 08:05 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:00
|
|
|
Xythar posted:http://au.gamespot.com/ps3/action/nier/review.html 5.0 from Gamespot. What the heck? Ironic, considering the score they gave Drakengard. http://uk.gamespot.com/ps2/action/drakengard/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary%3Bread-review
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:07
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Beyond that, "optional" shouldn't be an excuse for bad or unfun. But... it is. Because you don't have to do it. So it's like it's not even there if you don't want it to be. Tales of Vesperia had like the worst optional dungeon ever but I'm not going to hold it against the game because it's optional. I just skipped doing it entirely and got on with my life.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:24
|
|
|
Xythar posted:But... it is. Because you don't have to do it. So it's like it's not even there if you don't want it to be. It is optional, until you decide you want to see the last two endings of the game to see the entire story of the game in which case you have to play 4 of the 60-70 some odd quests to get weapons.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:30
|
|
|
OHGOD Honestly I don't know if he even got the other endings, he mentions new game + briefly but never says anything in the review about multiple endings at all.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:32
|
|
|
Xythar posted:OHGOD Again, the thing you're missing is this: games are not reviewed with a FAQ in hand. If something requires reading a bunch of FAQs to become apparent, it's probably so poorly designed as to be a detriment to anyone not playing with said FAQs in hand. I.e. bad game design. I wouldn't give Nier a 5 but I can see why someone would. The game makes itself pretty hard to approach and love.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:37
|
|
|
But I'm not playing with an FAQ either  There isn't even one available yet.I did a few of the quests for fun and skipped over the rest because I didn't feel like it, still enjoying game. The review doesn't even mention the fetch-questing is optional and paints an incorrect picture of Nier as a game where you have to run back and forth delivering various fresh produce for hours before you can progress with the story, when that actually isn't true at all.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:38
|
|
|
Xythar posted:But I'm not playing with an FAQ either Certain quests are required to get the game's alternate endings. There is not a clear indication of A) Which quests these are B) How many of them there are You know that most of these sidequests are optional because you read it here and someone warned you.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:39
|
|
|
Xythar posted:But I'm not playing with an FAQ either You're just talking with a bunch of other dudes on an Internet message board about the most efficient way to play the game, just like the rest of us. Seriously: Nier does a criminally poor job of explaining many central mechanics. That's just plain poor game design.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:39
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Certain quests are required to get the game's alternate endings. Which are also optional. I'll worry about those when the time comes, I certainly don't see them as impeding progress in the storyline right now. Der Shovel posted:Seriously: Nier does a criminally poor job of explaining many central mechanics. That's just plain poor game design. The only thing I've found so far that the game did not explain adequately was the fishing, and really that was half the game and half me being a dumbass who didn't think to look at the quest marker on my map. ImpAtom posted:You know that most of these sidequests are optional because you read it here and someone warned you. Um I know they're optional because the game didn't make me do them to progress. How would you even know the game has alternate endings if you're playing without any outside help?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:40
|
|
|
Xythar posted:Which are also optional. I'll worry about those when the time comes, I certainly don't see them as impeding progress in the storyline right now. If you consider the complete storyline to be optional, then I guess I can't really argue with you, but I don't agree. Xythar posted:
The game tells you upon finishing it. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 08:44 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:41
|
|
|
Yeah the only thing the game really doesn't explain that well is the fishing. I didn't bother to read the tutorial so I sort of randomly attempted it until I read it over and it clicked. The game tells you: Exactly how to get every ending. Where the quests are (if you go to the Tavern in the Village Devora will point you in the direction of all quests currently available) How many you've done and a rough estimate of how many you need to do.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:44
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:However, what you're arguing here is that you can go back. How do you know this? Considering the game has one point where all sidequests are permanently disabled, how do you know this won't occur and lock you out of something? How are you meant to know there's a point of no return without outside help? If you're going to get enough help to know it exists, you'll probably also find out that none of the weapons are missable. ImpAtom posted:The game tells you upon finishing it. By which point you have already made the decision to not waste time with the optional sidequests.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:45
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Yeah the only thing the game really doesn't explain that well is the fishing. I didn't bother to read the tutorial so I sort of randomly attempted it until I read it over and it clicked. The game does not tell you specifically which quests get you weapons. That is the problem with the argument against "optional." Xythar posted:How are you meant to know there's a point of no return without outside help? If you're going to get enough help to know it exists, you'll probably also find out that none of the weapons are missable. Because it happens at the midpoint of the game. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 08:48 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:45
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The game does not tell you specifically which quests get you weapons. That is the problem with the argument against "optional." I'm glad we've now cleared this up to the point where the word "optional", previously defined as "something you are not required to do", now actually means "something you don't know whether you need to do or not without using an FAQ". This argument is getting increasingly stupid but my point is basically this: 1) The only reason the optional fetch quests would bother someone is if they either had an OCD compulsion to do them all, or they were worried about missing an alternate ending. 2) The only reason you would be worried about missing an alternate ending is if you already read guides and spoiled aspects of the gameplay to yourself in advance. 3) If you read guides and spoiled aspects of the gameplay to yourself in advance, might as well learn which ones you need to do. Basically if you go into the game with no knowledge at all, you'd have no reason to feel obligated to do the fetch quests.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:47
|
|
|
Of course it doesn't. Why should it? I think it's safe to assume that most people will think to themselves, after being told that they've got to get all the weapons for the alternate endings (by the game) that they've explored the game enough to know that they're probably not just lying around or they'd more than likely have found them by now and that the only possible place they could be is quest rewards. I managed to find all the weapons no problem. Then again I do have 98% quest completion.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:49
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I managed to find all the weapons no problem. Then again I do have 98% quest completion. Let me guess, that loving quest where that girl in Facade wants rare moonflower seeds? (god I hate that quest)
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:50
|
|
|
Xythar posted:I'm glad we've now cleared this up to the point where the word "optional", previously defined as "something you are not required to do", now actually means "something you don't know whether you need to do or not without using an FAQ". So would you argue that, say, everything in Symphony of the Night's Reverse Castle, or Portrait of Ruin's post-Sisters fight is optional content?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:50
|
|
|
Yeah that's the sucker. Probably never going to get that one. I didn't find the quests that bad, mainly because I usually did them in batches. I got all the quests available to me at points and then when I went to the area where they needed to be completed (more than likely I'd go there for story reasons) it was a simple task of staying there maybe a couple of minutes more than I'd strictly need to otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:51
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:So would you argue that, say, everything in Symphony of the Night's Reverse Castle, or Portrait of Ruin's post-Sisters fight is optional content? I haven't even played those, but if it's postgame content like the second quest in Zelda, or the postgame dungeons in Star Ocean anything, or Julius Mode in Dawn of Sorrow then yes I would. Can we at least agree that the Gamespot review is deceptive in acting like the fetch quests are a compulsory part of the storyline? With quotes like this: quote:You get the impression that 10 hours of promising content was mercilessly stretched into a 30-hour marathon of fetch quests and squandered potential. it'd be hard for any reader to assume otherwise. Xythar fucked around with this message at 08:54 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:52
|
|
|
Xythar posted:I haven't even played those, but if it's postgame content like the second quest in Zelda, or the postgame dungeons in Star Ocean anything, or Julius Mode in Dawn of Sorrow then yes I would. In SotN, you have to find two items to access a hidden area. In doing so, you find a pair of glasses that alter the "final boss," and allow the game to continue onwards into an entire second upside-down version of the castle where the plot continues and situations are resolved that are not resolved in the main plot. Would you say this is optional?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:54
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:In SotN, you have to find two items to access a hidden area. In doing so, you find a pair of glasses that alter the "final boss," and allow the game to continue onwards into an entire second upside-down version of the castle where the plot continues and situations are resolved that are not resolved in the main plot. Would you say this is optional? Yeah probably, especially if it just reuses the whole castle like that, and especially if you can just finish the game and get to the credits without doing it (by not finding the glasses I assume). I'd have to play it to see.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 08:55
|
|
|
Xythar posted:Yeah probably, especially if it just reuses the whole castle like that. I'd have to play it to see. Well, that's your choice, but most people would strongly disagree with you. It is over half the game's content and features new bosses, items, enemies and content that is not present in the main castle, as well as an actual resolution to the plot. It's 'optional' insomuch as you will get the credits to roll if you don't find the item, but it isn't optional if you want access to most of the game's content or resolution to plot. To use an example you might agree with more: Think about Persona 4. Think about a series of choices required in Persona 4 that you have to get correct or else the game goes to its bad ending. Do you consider everything that comes after that optional? Xythar posted:Can we at least agree that the Gamespot review is deceptive in acting like the fetch quests are a compulsory part of the storyline? With quotes like this: But how is the reviewer supposed to know that they're not compulsory, especially when some are? That's the point. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 09:05 on May 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 09:02
|
|
|
I wouldn't consider the SotN Reverse Castle and NIER's C and D endings to have the same "weight" to them. The Reverse Castle basically doubles the amount of gameplay present in the game while C and D are basically just extended ending sequences and a single additional boss fight. Still the concept of what you're presenting is pretty much on the mark.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 09:04
|
|
|
Policenaut posted:I wouldn't consider the SotN Reverse Castle and NIER's C and D endings to have the same "weight" to them. The Reverse Castle basically doubles the amount of gameplay present in the game while C and D are basically just extended ending sequences and a single additional boss fight. Yeah, I'm not trying to imply that it adds a ton of gameplay. The reason I consider it important is because Nier is a game about the characters, and B/C/D are heavily about the characters. Nobody really plays Castlevania for plot, and so the extra castle is a major boon because it adds extra gameplay. For Nier, however, B/C/D are resolutions that don't exist in the A storyline.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 09:06
|
|
|
bump_fn posted:NY Times review of Nier - long story short, Schiesel wants the supreme court to play this game. That's pretty much the vibe I've gotten from the game so far. The gameplay is fairly basic (although can we stop this 'Admit it's objectively bad! You know it's true!' witchhunt - it's loving stupid), but everything else just comes together to result in something with so much more soul than most games released today. It was pretty obvious that this game was going to be divisive from the very first videos released, but it seems that the dividing line seems to have fallen on the games fishing mechanics, which is just weird.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
Sakurazuka posted:Ironic, considering the score they gave Drakengard. It's more that it's funny considering that the same dude reviewed Drakengard and Nier and gave the former a higher score.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2010 09:27
|
|